GK vs LRGC
AdvisorShares Gerber Kawasaki ETF vs AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF
Which is better, GK or LRGC?
LRGC has been ahead.
LRGC has a lower expense ratio. LRGC led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. LRGC is less concentrated, with 44.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 62.7%.
MarketXLS is not an investment adviser. This comparison is generated automatically from market data and is for information only. A Best mark means the better reading on that one measure, not a recommendation to buy.
Side-by-Side Comparison
| Metric | GK | LRGC |
|---|---|---|
| Expense Ratio | 0.77% | 0.39%Best |
| AUM | $32M | $1.4B |
| Dividend Yield | 0.07% | 0.53% |
| Holdings | 60 | 72 |
| YTD Return | +10.81% | +10.99%Best |
| 1Y Return | +8.34% | +13.29%Best |
| 3Y Return (annualized) | +19.66% | +20.81%Best |
| 5Y Return (annualized) | +2.56% | - |
| Volatility (annualized) | 18.8% | 12.5%Best |
| Max Drawdown | -23.6% | -19.4%Best |
| $10,000 over 3.1 years | $17,085 | $17,762Best |
| Top 10 Weight | 62.7% | 44.8%Best |
| Fund Family | Advisor Shares | AllianceBernstein L.P. |
| Category | Equity | Equity |
| Style | Large Cap Growth | Large Cap Growth |
| Inception | Jul 1, 2021 | Sep 20, 2023 |
Volatility and max drawdown, and the $10,000 over 3.1 years row, are measured over the window both funds cover: Sep 20, 2023 to Oct 14, 2026 (3.1 years).
GK vs LRGC growth
Month-end closes. Both lines start at 0% in the first month shown, so the gap between them is the difference in growth across that window. The full view covers the 3.1 years both funds cover.
GK vs LRGC Performance
AdvisorShares Gerber Kawasaki ETF (GK) is an ETF from Advisor Shares and AB US Large Cap Strategic Equities ETF (LRGC) is an ETF from AllianceBernstein L.P.. Over the past year GK returned +8.34% while LRGC returned +13.29%. Year to date, GK is up 10.81% versus a gain of 10.99% for LRGC.
Over three years, GK compounded at +19.66% per year against +20.81% for LRGC.
Past performance does not guarantee future results.
Risk: Volatility and Drawdowns
GK has been the more volatile fund, with annualized monthly volatility of 18.8% compared with 12.5% for LRGC. Lower volatility generally means a smoother ride, though it often comes with lower long-run returns.
The deepest peak-to-trough decline in our data was -23.6% for GK and -19.4% for LRGC. Drawdown depth is what each fund did in the worst stretch of the window measured above.
The two funds' monthly returns correlate at 0.91. They move almost in lockstep, so holding both mostly duplicates the same exposure.
Fees and Cost Over Time
GK charges 0.77% per year while LRGC charges 0.39%. On a $10,000 position that is $77 vs $39 annually, a gap of $38 per year that compounds over a long holding period. On income, GK currently yields 0.07% against 0.53% for LRGC.
Holdings Overlap
59.6% of GK's money is in holdings LRGC also owns. 39.7% of LRGC's money is in holdings GK also owns.
The two portfolios partly overlap.
11 positions in common, counted across the 27 positions we hold weights for in GK and 69 in LRGC, against full books of 60 and 72.
What only one of them owns
Our book lists 54 positions for LRGC that do not appear in our book for GK (56.3% of the fund), and 15 for GK that do not appear in LRGC (39.0%).
Some of those will be the same company recorded under a different code in one of the two books, so the real difference in what you would own is no larger than this and may be smaller. We do not name the individual positions here for that reason.
Top Shared Holdings
| Stock | Weight in GK | Weight in LRGC | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| NVDANvidia Corp | 8.14% | 8.71% | 0.57% |
| GOOGAlphabet Inc. C | 8.15% | 6.09% | 2.06% |
| MSFTMicrosoft Corp | 5.24% | 6.66% | 1.42% |
| AAPLApple, Inc | 5.48% | 5.71% | 0.23% |
| MUMicron Technology, Inc. | 10.42% | 0.76% | 9.66% |
| AMZNAmazon.Com Inc | 3.65% | 4.69% | 1.04% |
| LLYEli Lilly & Co. | 7.28% | 0.80% | 6.48% |
| AVGOBroadcom Inc | 4.35% | 2.93% | 1.42% |
| GEVGe Vernova, Inc. | 4.26% | 0.94% | 3.32% |
| APHAmphenol Corp. Class A | 1.99% | 0.87% | 1.12% |
59.6% of GK is already inside LRGC.
You probably hold more than these two. Add the rest and see how much of the whole book is the same companies twice.
Free for up to 10 holdings. No account needed.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which is cheaper, GK or LRGC?
GK has an expense ratio of 0.77% while LRGC charges 0.39%. LRGC is the cheaper option, by $38 a year on a $10,000 investment.
Which performed better, GK or LRGC?
Over the past year GK returned +8.34% vs +13.29% for LRGC, so LRGC leads on 1-year performance. Past performance does not guarantee future results. This is information, not a recommendation.
Which is riskier, GK or LRGC?
GK has been the more volatile fund at 18.8% annualized versus 12.5% for LRGC. Worst drawdown: GK -23.6% vs LRGC -19.4%.
Should I hold both GK and LRGC?
GK and LRGC have a monthly-return correlation of 0.91, so they move almost identically. What is left to separate them is the fee and the index each one tracks. This is information, not a recommendation.
What is the holdings overlap between GK and LRGC?
59.6% of GK's money is in holdings LRGC also owns. 39.7% of LRGC's is in holdings GK also owns. They hold 11 positions in common, counted across the 27 positions we hold weights for in GK and 69 in LRGC.
Which pays a higher dividend, GK or LRGC?
GK yields 0.07% while LRGC yields 0.53%, so LRGC currently pays the higher dividend yield.
Is LRGC better than GK?
LRGC has a lower expense ratio. LRGC led over 1Y, 3Y and the full window. The two have moved almost in lockstep, correlation 0.91. LRGC is less concentrated, with 44.8% of the fund in its ten largest positions against 62.7%. Which one suits a particular account depends on what it is for. This is information, not a recommendation.